Property NSW RMP

Property NSW RMP – July 2016 (PDF version)

This bulletin is to update members on what has happened since the release of the draft Restructure Management Plan (RMP) for Property NSW on Thursday 9 June.

PSA Industrial Advocate Matthew Drake-Brockman met with various affected members from Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority (SHFA) and Property NSW (PNSW) met to discuss the RMP and draw out aspects of it which need improvement.

PSA staff and members thereafter met with representatives of THA, PNSW and SFHA to discuss the RMP and its implications for members.

The following is a list of the points that the PSA raised and argued for inclusion in the final draft of the RMP.

1. The PSA is seeking clear information regarding all roles that will be outsourced or affected by outsourcing in this restructure. This has not been made clear in any of the information provided to date.
2. The PSA is seeking further information regarding Events that will move to Destination NSW and the impacts that this move will or may have on staff.
3. Further, the PSA seeks that SHFA staff affected by the movement of SFHA functions involving Events, to Destination NSW have the opportunity to move to that organisation to perform those functions. The processes should be appropriately aligned to allow this to occur, and we are seeking urgent discussions between both organisations.
4. Teacher Housing Authority (THA) – Corporate Support Services is part of the DFSI larger Corporate Shared Services Review. The Department confirmed at the meeting on 27 June 2016 that there is no impact for THA staff. Management has agreed that it will communicate this to staff.
5. A number of functions are still in review. Mentioned were heritage, horticultural and specialist maintenance roles, including those for the Chinese Gardens and the Harbour Bridge. Management advised that this review will be concluded within the timing of the RMP recruitment program. Heritage is still being finalised. Management is in discussions with the teams impacted and has indicated that it may need a little more work to finalise numbers and retained functions in these areas. The PSA seeks this information prior to any implementation.
6. The PSA argued consultation about a workable structure did not seem to be filtered down to the affected staff via their line management. The PSA also advised the RMP design did not seem to understand the vertical integration of business functions as it had been developed only with Executive input. PSA members would like to have opportunity to ensure management understands their role/contribution to organisational goals before the RMP is finalised. A vertical cross business consultation was suggested.
7. The PSA is seeking an extension from five to 10 days for staff to be able to make an application for a vacant role in the new structure.
8. The PSA is seeking to have pay for those transferring to a different classification to be grand-parented with the subsequent payment of all annual increments and pay rises.
9. Where a role that is continuing in the new structure has been substantially and satisfactorily performed by a particular officer that officer should be directly appointed to that role without a recruitment process having to be undertaken. In the situation where there are more people in those distinct roles than roles remaining, the PSA’s position is that only then should recruitment be undertaken.
10. Where GPNSW employees affected by the RMP have recently been appointed to roles that remain largely the same and where there are more roles than existing ongoing employees these people should be directly appointed.

Management has also confirmed that all PNSW staff including SHFA staff will receive the 2.5 percent increase from 1 July.

We are now waiting for Management to come back to us on each of these points and will update members in due course.